I swear, I was a combined total of about 12" away from something like a -8 today, but alas, I had to settle for a -2. The worst disappointment was on # 9, where I hit the basket about 3 inches below an ace, and then missed the comeback putt from the vines behind the basket. Then there was the long upshot on #10 that was a gnat's ass from going in, and about a half dozen putts that hit the right side of the chains or the inside of the basket and fell out. And it would have been a "clean" round if I hadn't thrown my drive in the water on the easiest hole on the course, #17. The only easier hole I know of on this side of Atlanta is #12 at ERP, and I threw the danged thing in the water. *sigh*

So anyway I thought I'd share. Let the hazing begin, but if Jason Tokio starts in on it, I may sell his SL to PIAS.

Lewis wrote:I swear, I was a combined total of about 12" away from something where I hit the basket about 3 inches below an a$!, and then missed the comeback from behind the basket. Then there was the long shot that was a gnat's ass from going in, and about a half dozen that hit the right side basket and fell out. And it would have been "clean"if I hadn't thrown my d on the easiest hole. The only easier hole I know of on this side of Atlanta is at ERPSo anyway I thought I'd share. Let the hazing begin, but if Jason Tokio starts in on it, I may sell his SL to PIAS.

That's what she said...

Living in the United States where the hottest European import is Plutocracy...

grease wrote:That reminds me of a similar round I had at Lake Russell where, if I had thrown every hole 100% correctly, I would have shot a -36. Instead I shot a +2.

There's a thread somewhere on dgcoursereview.com where someone tries to make the argument that you could have a maximum throwing distance of 300' and be a top-flight pro. Theory is if every tee shot is on a perfect line and you make every putt within 30', you could throw a nearly 1100-rated round. I don't think it assumes aces under 300', but still it's not a very good argument for throwing far not being an important element of the game. Still, I do wish I could get my body to do what I want every time. It's maddening to feel and know you're going to miss the putt before it even leaves your hand.

But I really did hit the right side of the basket on #9 with my drive. A couple inches and the disc sticks, that's two strokes and gets me to -4. My upshot on #10 that chained out would be another stroke: -5. That's three strokes in no more than 5 or 6 inches. All I need is to make a 15' putt on #5 and not let my drive trickle into the water on #12, and I'm at -7, and that's the shots I clearly remember from that round. And I'm sure with the extra 3 strokes of confidence after hitting an ace and a long deuce would have me making these and several other putts. Maybe I was only 6 inches from a -12 round! If only I could be perfect. *sigh*

Double Dangit! Today I threw a -6 but I failed to birdie most of the easy holes, which IMO are 1, 6, 7, 11, 13, 16, and 17. Instead I birdied 3, 5, 10, 12, 16, and 17. But this time I won't complain about the gimme putt I missed on 2 or the one I should have made on 7, because I made a few putts I shouldn't have, and the creek was less than a disc wide on 18 where I threw it.

Y'all be careful out there today. In an hour of disc golf, I nearly got heatstroke.

I was the 3 inches off the highest rated round of ALL TIME at Riverview Park in the 2009 Augusta Classic (true story.) But then again, If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry Christmas.

Lewis wrote:There's a thread somewhere on dgcoursereview.com where someone tries to make the argument that you could have a maximum throwing distance of 300' and be a top-flight pro. Theory is if every tee shot is on a perfect line and you make every putt within 30', you could throw a nearly 1100-rated round. I don't think it assumes aces under 300', but still it's not a very good argument for throwing far not being an important element of the game. Still, I do wish I could get my body to do what I want every time. It's maddening to feel and know you're going to miss the putt before it even leaves your hand.

It doesn't count aces or field aces. Anything less than a 330' hole requires a minimum score of 2. It's a theoretical exercise meant to show that control has a bigger impact on score than max distance. I set up a spreadsheet to calculate the theoretical player's score using multiple driving and putting distances, all you need is the hole distances. For example, perfectly placed 250ft drives and all puts inside 20 ft would shoot a 47 at Redan with 15 and a few other holes in the long.

The main thing the theoretical player's score doesn't directly take into account is tight obstacles.